Murali was the greatest bowler ever, without question

I would argue that - whatever people may say about it, and leaving aside considerations such as personality or entertainment value - Murali was the greatest ever bowler.

The evidence is that:

1. We have to assume that standards in sport are rising all the time, so that recent sports people are better than those of previous generations. This applies to all sports with objective measurements (running, jumping,, throwing etc), and we must assume it applies to competitive sports.

2. The most valuable bowler is a great spinner. Because a spinner can bowl more time and more overs than a quick bowler, as and when required.

3. Murali is the greatest spinner of the most recent generation. His main rival was Shane Warne, and Murali outperfomed Warne.

I did the folowing analysis in 2008, before Murali's recent decline, which was published as a letter in Wisden monthly.

v England: Murali 7.15 wickets per match @ 19.74; Warne 5.41 wickets per match @ 23.25;

v South Africa: Murali 6.93 wickets per match @ 22.22; Warne 5.42 wickets per match @ 24.16;

v India Murali 4.47 wickets per match @ 32.47; Warne 3.07 wickets per match @ 47.18;

v Pakistan: Murali 5.64 wickets per match @ 23.31; Warne 6.00 wickets per match @ 20.17.

Warne out-performs Murali against Pakistan, but Murali dominates Warne against the other three major test teams.

I would particularly highlight Murali against England - considering that Warne was always considered to bowl especially well against England, yet he was totally out-perfomed by Murali; and Murali's superb performances against India - in an era when India had the second-best batting in the world.

(India were second only to Australia, against whom Murali still managed to take a very impressive 4.5 wickets per match although at a modest average of 36 - sadly we will never know the comparison of how Warne would have performed against Australia.)

I lay considerable stress on the statistic of the number of wickets a bowler takes per match as a measure of how much a bowler contributes as an individual to test victories. In this respect Murali ranks very high throughout history - with only SF Barnes scoring significantly higher than Murali's 6 test wickets per match - and over a much smaller number of matches than Murali.

And of course Murali's basic statistic is that he has taken more test wickets than anyone else ever - which reflects that Murali's incomparably high value to his team over many years.

Murali therefore is the most recent bowler who made the largest contribution to his team (both in sheer volume and also per match) - and he therefore deserves the accolade of 'the greatest ever'.

More on Warne versus Murali (v Kumble) - top-spinner versus flipper

*

I recently saw a journalistic piece by Shane Warne on the subject of Muttiah Muralitharan (Murali) - full of back-handed (!) compliments; the sub-text of which was that the Australian batsmen in Australia had 'worked out' Murali, and negated his doosra - which is why Murali's record against Australia was modest (13 matches, 59 wickets at an average of 36) especially in Australia was poor (5 matches, 12 wickets at 75).

Of course, since Australia were the best batting side in test cricket during this era, especially in Australia, this is strictly *irrelevant* to a comparison between Warne and Murali - Warne never bowled against the great Australian batting side; and in those match-ups against the best non-Australian test sides Murali clearly out-performed Warne

http://the-doosra.blogspot.com/2010_07_01_archive.html

of particular relevance is the comparaitive record against India, which was the second best batting side after Australia during the Warne v Murali era:

Murali 4.5 wickets per match @ 33; Warne 3 wickets per match @ 47

*

IF Warne had bolwed against Australia he would have been much less effective than against other sides; because Australians use their feet against spin, negating Warnes best variation for the early part of his career - the Flipper: a faster, straight, pitched-up delivery which could trap LBW those batters who stepped back and played spinners from their crease - but which is negated by batters (such as Australians) who play forward and skip down the wicket to spinners.

*

The high bouncing top-spinners is the spinner's straight delivery variation which would be most effective against batters who come forward to spin - and who was the best recent top-spin bowler?

Neither Warne, nor Murali - but Anil Kumble.

Take a look at Kumble's record against Australia in Australia: 10 matches, 49 wickets (!) albeit at an average of 37 (spinners do the bulk of bowling in high scoring losing matches, which hurts their averages).

This suggests to me that spin bowlers who have a lot of top spin on their straight ought to have done better against the great Australian sides of the 1990s and early 2000s than did spinners who lacked such a variation.

*

(Also relevant is that some Australian umpires in Australia were no-balling and referring Murali for throwing; and this seriously damaged his confidence since it was potentially career-ending. My opinion on this is that throwing is an irrelevant consideration with respect to Murali's unique action; because even if he did straighten his elbow, the delivery was only a 'back-chuck': with the back of the hand and the point of the elbow facing the batter. ie. Murali delivered the ball with the forearm in supination - to use the anatomical term. The regulations banning throwing implicitly apply to the front of hand delivery with the forearm in pronation; when a chuck can be much faster than a straight arm delivery. Indeed throwing with the forearm in supination could lead to quick bowlers delivering balls at over 100 mph - like a baseball pitcher's 95 mph thrown delivery from standing *plus* the extra speed from a run-up. Dangerous!)

Murali is better than Warne - of course!

Congratulations to Murali for getting the highest ever number of test wickets (709) and passing Shane Warne.

Pundits have been comparing Warne and Murali, and most seem to think Warne is better.

But they are wrong: the numbers are clear - Murali is the better bowler.

Warne never bowled against the best batting side in the world - ie. Australia - so the two bowlers can only be compared in terms of their performances against the second rank of test match sides. These have, in recent years, been England and South Africa, followed by India and Pakistan.

Murali's performances against England, South Africa and India are significantly better than Warne's - against Pakistan Warne was slightly better than Murali. So Murali is the better bowler.

Stats from Statsguru at cricinfo.com - before the current Sri Lanka versus England Match.

South Africa: Murali 6.9 wickets per match av. 22; Warne 5.4 wickets per match av. 24

England: Murali 7.2 wickets per match av. 20; Warne 5.4 wickets per match av. 23.

India: Murali 4.5 wickets per match av. 32; Warne 3.1 wickets per match av. 47.

Pakistan: Murali 5.6 wickets per match av. 23; Warne 6 wickets per match av. 20.

PS. This analysis confirms that India have been the second-best batting side (after Australia) over the past 15 or so years.

Warne v Murali

(This is an edited - and more precisely calculated - version of the posting below which was published as a letter in The Wisden Cricketer January 2008, page 10.)

Murali is the better bowler, just look at the statistics.

Warne never bowled against the best batting side in the world - Australia - so the two bowlers can be compared only in terms of their perfomances against the second ranked Test sides.

These have, in recent years, been England and South Africa, followed by India and Pakistan. If you look at average and wickets per match, Murali's perfomances against England, South Africa and India are significantly better than Warne's. Warne edges it against Pakistan. Here are the numbers from before the Sri Lanka-England series.

v England: Murali 7.15 wickets per match @ 19.74; Warne 5.41 wickets per match @ 23.25; v South Africa: Murali 6.93 wickets per match @ 22.22; Warne 5.42 wickets per match @ 24.16; v India Murali 4.47 wickets per match @ 32.47; Warne 3.07 wickets per match @ 47.18; v Pakistan: Murali 5.64 wickets per match @ 23.31; Warne 6.00 wickets per match @ 20.17.

Bruce G Charlton

Newcastle upon Tyne

Three ways to bowl a doosra

There are three main ways to bowl a doosra: 1. a back-chuck/ weak throw; 2. with shoulder rotation; 3. with body rotation.

I will define a true doosra as a leg-break delivered with the back of the hand facing the batter, and the forearm in anatomical supination.

(Supination means the forearm is rotated in the opposite direction to the leg-spinner. Leg spinners have the forearm pronated. If the arm is held out in front with the thumb upright, moving the thumb outwards (clockwise) is supination, moving the thumb inwards (anticlockwise) is pronation.)

The big problem with the doosra is imparting sufficiently rapid rotations onto the ball. This is the reason why most off-break bowlers do not bowl the doosra - it is not that they can't spin the ball at all, but that without some extra way of applying spin the ball is merely gently-rolled from the fingers, and the rotations are so slow that the ball is barely spinning.

1. Back-chuck

The back-chuck/ weak throw is the method used by most of the doosra bowlers whose actions have been reported or declared illegal. This involves rolling the ball towards slips with the fingers and wrist, but using the snap of an elbow-straightening/ throwing action to add extra rotations and pace onto the ball. This kind of doosra is a useful delivery since the spin and pace are potentially both enhanced by throwing. As I said, this is currently usually regarded as an illegal delivery (if the arm straightens more than 15 degrees). However, I think the back chuck should if possible be legalized.

2. Shoulder rotation

Shoulder rotation is used by Muralitheran, and is probably only possible for someone with a permanently bent elbow. Murali's stock off-break is delivered by twisting the whole arm from the shoulder so the bent elbow moves from right to left, plus swivelling the wrist, to deliver the ball from the back of the hand over the gap between the thumb and index finger.

For the off-break Muralis fingers seem to pass over the top of the ball from right to left and releasing the ball towards leg slip (for a right handed batter). It has been described as similar to someone unscrewing a lightbulb clockwise and very fast.

Murali's doosra seems to be delivered by bending the wrist back on itself during delivery so that the fingers pass _under_ the ball from left to right and releasing the ball towards slips (for a right handed batter).

3. Body rotation

The other method for bowling a doosra seems to be that employed by Saqulain Mushtaq, who is credited with inventing the delivery: body rotation.

This gets a bit more rapid revolution of the ball because it is more of a top-spinner than a doosra, and the wrist has a larger range of movement in that side-on top-spin position. But the ball moves towards the slips (for a right handed batter) because Saqlain's arm swings across his body from right to left, and his body is swivelled round so that it is as if he is bowling at 45 degrees to the left of the batter, looking over his right shoulder.

Imagine coming-up to bowl at a right hander, but at the last moment swivelling around an extra 45 degrees anticlockwise and bowling at slip. This swivel brings the arm into such a position that a top spun delivery turns into a leg break. Then you would need to aim the ball at the stumps from this position, to replicate Saqlain.

I think that Johan Botha is trying to do the same - at the point of delivery he has rotated so far that he has almost turned his back on the batsman.

The body rotation method actually builds the bowling action around the doosra as the stock delivery (or at least a frequent one), and the off-break becomes a variation.

The problems with bowling the doosra using body rotation is that 1. the doosra is still rather a slow spinining delivery, slower than the conventional off break or leg break; and 2. the off break variation is sub-optimal, since the necessary degree of body rotation is less effective at generating spin than the usual off break bowlers action.

In conclusion, unless the back-chuck is legalized, then Murali will probably be the only bowler ever to posess a really fast-spinning doosra.

Saeed Ajmal is as good or better than Shane Warne

*

Warne: 4.9 wickets per Test Match; average 25; economy rate 2.7.

Ajmal: 5.3 wickets per Test Match; average 27; economy rate 2.7

So Ajmal takes significantly more wickets per test than Warne, but at a slightly higher average per wicket.

However, if adjustment is made for the generally higher batting and bowling averages of modern cricket compared with Warne's era, this probably leaves Ajmal ahead. 

Ajmal is a really, really good bowler! In the same league as Warne and better than any other spinner in the modern game except of course the best of all: Murali.

This means that , from statistics, currently - now - playing each other in the same Test series - we have one of the very greatest ten or so spin bowlers of all time, and probably the greatest ever pace bowler of all time.

(I mean Dale Steyn.)

Why isn't more of a fuss made about this?

*

Forearm spinners - the commonest type of spinner

*

The commonest type of spinner - the off-break and orthodox left arm spinners (like Monty Panesar and Graeme Swann) should properly be caused forearm spinners, since it is the supination of the forearm which imparts spin to the ball.

Supination is the rotation of the forearm from a position with the palm facing down and the thumb on the medial (middle) side being rotated to the palm is upwards and the thumb is on the lateral (out) side.

It is this rotation of the forearm which generates spin - and it has almost nothing to do with the fingers (they merely grip the ball firmly) - so the name 'finger spinner' is wrong and misleading.

*

True finger spinners are those rare types who use a finger flick to impart spin - such as Mendis or Herath's carrom ball, or from the past Jack Iverson.

*

Wrist spinners are mostly leg break and chinaman bowlers, who bowl with the forearm in pronation (thumb medially rotated - but Saeed Ajmal is a new kind of wrist spinner who bowls with the forearm in supination (thumb laterally rotated).

*

What of Murali?

He was mostly a shoulder spinner. The whole of his arm rotated, and the ball was either an off-break or a doora according to whether the wrist was flexed/ folded palm towards arm (doosra) or extended/ with wrist 'cocked' and back of hand towards arm (off break).

*

Some googlies are also shoulder-spun - bowled mostly from shoulder rotation, especially when the bowler has a round arm action like Shane Warne.

Warne's most serious injury was of his shoulder, and resulted from bowling a sequence of practice googlies to Ian Healy.

*

(By contrast, right arm wrist spinners with a high or vertical arm action - such as Chandrasekar or Kumble - tend to bowl googlies (or top-spinners) as their stock delivery rather than leg breaks; and their googly is bowled with a flick of the wrist and not by rotating the whole arm from the shoulder.)

*

England's team to win the 2010-2011 Ashes

Principle: you need five bowlers to win test matches with sufficient regularity - unless at least two of the bowlers are first rate.

England has only one first rate bowler (Swann) therefore we need five bowlers.

The reason is that the bowlers need to average about 15 wickets per match (at a reasonable average) between them to win matches (it does not have to be twenty wickets per match on average, since some wickets fall to stumpings, run outs etc. and a some test matches will inevitably end as draws due to weather or good/ lucky batting (although I believe there are more draws than 'necessary' due to many teams having inadequate bowling resources for the modern game).

Most frontline test bowlers average about 3-4 wickets per test match - the good ones nearer to 4. Great bowlers usually get more than 4 (e.g. McGrath) or about 5 (Warne) - amazing bowlers get 6 (Murali) - and the most ever was 7 wickets per test match (SF Barnes).

A batting all-rounder like Flintoff or Kallis will usually only get 2-3 wickets per match - for example, Sobers took 'only' 2.5 wickets per test match - but those extra wickets from the fifth bowler make a critical difference to the ability of a team to win. It also allows a team to win even when a frontline bowler is injured during a match.

NOTE - Currently Australia are strong in batting, but only moderate in bowling. This means that England need to focus on bowling, because the series will be decided by who wins the contest between English bowlers and Aussie batters.

Therefore:

1. Strauss

2. Cook or Trott or even Bell (who cares? - this is the weakest batter)

3. Peterson

4. Collingwood

5. Morgan (come on - he has *got* to play, cricket is about entertainment: or Bell if you really want to be boring)

6. Prior (he has an excellent record at number 6 - much better than Flintoff, about as good as Alec Stewart taking into account that modern averages are higher; but if England now refuse to bat Prior at 6, then Kieswatter will have to come in).

7. Bresnan

8. Swann

9. Broad

10. Anderson

11. Finn (or Onions depending on fitness/ conditions/ resting)


If it is a spinning wicket then substitute Yardy for Bresnan.

If this team could be fielded, it should be able to beat the current Aussies.

Reverse wrist/ off-break doosra bowling needs a bent elbow - but chucking is not necessary

*

This report about Ajmal clarifies what seems anatomically necessary: that a reverse wrist spinner/ off-break-doosra bowler very probably needs to have a bent elbow, but does not entail chucking

http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan-v-england-2012/content/current/story/552579.html

This is quite simply because the elbow needs to be bent in order to rotate the arm (specifically to rotate the shoulder) to point the elbow towards slips (for a right handed batter) - which enables the forward flip of the wrist to generate the doosra.

*

Note added 12 March 2012 - it is notable that the two best doosra bowlers so far seem to have had a permanently bent, unstraightenable elbow on their bowling arm.

Murali had this congenitally (i.e. he was born with a bent elbow), while Ajmal had a bent elbow as a result of an accident.

This suggests that unless a bowler has a bent elbw, he will probably not be a really effective (as well as legal) doosra bowler.

The possible exception is Saqlain Mushtaq; but for whatever reason, nobody seems to be able to replicate his method.

http://the-doosra.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/how-to-bowl-doosra-without-chucking.html

*

What makes a high quality, long-term test spinner?

1. Accuracy and reliability, obviously.

2. Usually a powerfully-spun (fizzing) stock delivery with lots of revolutions on it; but if not then plenty of bounce at slow-medium pace (e.g. Kumble, SF Barnes, Mendis).

3. A well-disguised variation. At the highest level is is vital that the variation be hard/ impossible to pick. If it is, then the variation need not be anything spectacular - a good 'arm ball' for a slow left arm orthodox/ of-spinner is as good as a doosra- or , and a legspinner's straight delivery is as good as a googly/ wrong-un.

Contrariwise, if the variation is easy to pick then it is pretty useless at the highest level; even if it is a spectacularly-turning googly, an excocet-missile flipper or a high-bouncing doosra.

Swann is evidence of all this. He is the best spinner in the world on the basis of accuracy and reliability, a high-rev off break and a straight 'gyro' ball. In particular he is better than any of the doosra bowlers, because his gyro variation is very difficult/ impossible to pick - unlike most doosras (exceptions being Murali, and perhaps Saeed Ajmal).

Almost all spin is wrist spin: Mendis is the only finger spinner

The distinction between 'finger spinners' (e.g. orthodox off-spin and left arm spin) and 'wrist spinners' (e.g. leg-break and chinaman bowlers) is nonsense. Almost all spin bowling is wrist spin. Ajantha Mendis is, in fact, the only finger spinner in world cricket.

If this wasn't the case, then all 'finger spinners' would be able to bowl a doosra using their fingers. Try it, it is easy to flick the ball the opposite direction using only fingers - but this is a very weak spin and very tiring for the fingers, so it is un-usable in match conditions.

It is precisely because of the difficulty of rotating the wrist forward and fast in both directions that it is so rare to be able to bowl a doosra without throwing.

(I think Murali can bowl a doosra only because of his bent elbow and massive shoulder rotation; and I think Saqlain's doosra is rolled, rather than spun, over the top of the fingers and out from under the thumb, using an unusual arm action which brings the arm over towards slips. They confirm that the doosra can be bowled legally only by people with unusual anatomies.).

But there are a few rare finger spinners, and these are the spinners who can flick the ball with their middle finger - Mendis is the latest (and perhaps most impressive-ever) example.

And because they do not use the wrist to impart spin, these finger-flick spinners can turn the ball in either direction, the wrist is simply rotated to point the thumb in the direction the ball needs to spin and turn.

The difficulty with this true finger spin is - I think - fatigue. If it was not to prevent fatigue, then Mendis would presumably bowl his flicker/ carrom ball all of the time. As it is, he apparently bowls wrist-spun off-breaks as a stock delivery, and uses the various finger-flicked-deliveries as a variation.

After all, Mendis can bowl off-breaks using his finger flicked googly - so why would he want/ need to bowl off-breaks from the front of his hand? There is no reason for Mendis ever to bowl front-of-hand off-breaks except for the need (in long bowling spells in the long form of the game) to reduce fatigue on his middle finger

I haven't yet seen an extended video of Mendis, but my guess would be that he probably bowls half or more deliveries as off-breaks; i.e. using his wrist to impart off-spin and cutting-down the number of times he needs to use the finger flick, and thereby preventing exhaustion.

I would predict that the longer the spells Mendis bowls, the more off breaks he would need to bowl - or else his middle finger muscles would simply become exhausted.

Simon Hughes blows a fuse over the doosra

*

I'm a big fan of Simon 'the analyst' Hughes as a writer and TV commenter - but this video of him supposedly trying to bowl a doosra is very annoying:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/sportvideo/cricketvideo/9034353/

Simon-Hughes-tries-to-bowl-the-doosra.html

The doosra is in the news because of Ajmal's mastery dissection of the English batters in the current test series, but what Hughes is bowling bears zero resemblance to Ajmal's innovative action.

Hughes makes the usual mistake of bowling a conventional off-break - where the ball is gripped between index and middle fingers, and which uses forearm supination to impart most of the spin; then trying to turn this action around to make it into a leg-break - which is pretty much impossible, otherwise off-spinners would have been bowling doosras ever since the beginning of cricket.

But Ajmal has devised a new way of bowling - with a 'back-flip' extension of the wrist, and ball gripped between middle and ring fingers - so Ajmal's off-break is nothing like Hughes off-break delivery.

*

For heavens sake, can't people see the difference - it isn't subtle!

That's why I began this blog - because the pundits don't seem to look at the way that innovative spin bowlers are doing their tricks; and the most ridiculous tosh gets written about, say, Paul Adams, Murali and now Ajmal.

*

How does Saeed Ajmal bowl his doosra?

*

Originally posted Wednesday, May 25, 2011

*

I have been watching the West Indies v Pakistan Test series on TV, and thoroughly enjoyed watching Ajmal bowl.

He is a real craftsman, and looks like currently being the second best spinner in the world (after Swann).

*

He also has the best doosra ever - in the sense that he is the first off-spinner to have a doosra good enough to be a stock delivery - it doesn't seem to cost much effort, seems impossible for the batsman to 'pick' from the hand, has a useful bats-width deviation and very good bounce.

*

How does he do it?

Of course I don't know for sure - but I think this is the method:

1. He uses his middle finger as the spinning finger for the doosra (contrasted with using the index finger for spinning the off-break).

But the grip doesn't look very different for the two deliveries.

2. He also uses a flip of the wrist - specifically an extension of the wrist - to impart extra spin.

This is an important innovation, since without this extra wrist flip, the doosra would spin only slowly; but with this wrist extension he get good top-spinning revolutions which gives his doosra dip and bounce.

*

The reason that the doosra is so rare is that the off break is usually bowled using a rotation of the forearm (anatomically called supination - like putting your elbow on the table with the forearm lying flat, and moving from having the palm on the table to palm facing upwards).

But supination cannot be used when the back of the hand is facing the batter (the forearm is already supinated), so most bowlers would need to rely on a small amount of finger-imparted spin, a small sideways movement of the wrist (called adduction) and perhaps an element of elbow straightening (a 'back-chuck').

But by flipping his wrist forward, Ajmal is able to produce plenty of spin without throwing.

*

His other advantage is that (I guess) Ajmaal has built his bowling action around the doosra - with an almost vertical arm action, so that his off-break is bowled from a very similar action and hand position - his off-break is more of a top-spinner than most other off-break bowlers.

Most off-break bowlers build their action around optimizing their off-break - then they find that they cannot bowl a doosra - or at least not without chucking, or bowling something very obvious and easy to 'pick'.

So (leaving aside Murali as a one-off and unclassifiable bowler) I believe that Saeed Ajmal should be recognized as the first international quality true doosra bowler!

*